Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Proposal: Setting up the scenery

Open for more than 12 hours, quorums 5-1.—Quirck

Adminned at 25 Jul 2012 13:23:20 UTC

Add a new rule “Newcomers” with the following text:

Upon arrival of a new Farmer, the Demon gives him a house with 50 Bottles with Cursed Water (CW) and one Manul wearing an Amulet with unique id.

For the purpose of this proposal, treat every player as a new Farmer.

Add a rule “Housekeeping”:

The following data shall be tracked in the GNDT:
* number of Bottles with Cursed Water a Farmer possesses (“CW” column);
* list of ids of amulets worn by alive Manuls a Farmer has (“Amulets” column);
* total number of alive Manuls a Farmer has (“Manuls” column).

Add a rule “Manuls are living creatures” with the text:

Each Manul may wear not more than one Amulet. When a Manul wearing an Amulet dies, that Amulet disappears.


Each Amulet has a hidden information associated with it, which can be privately told to a Farmer keeping the Amulet, for a certain compensation. But what the informaion is, and how it influences the game, is to be defined yet.


Clucky: he/him

24-07-2012 22:21:01 UTC

against seems fairly poorly worded. you arguably have to generate a unique id for all 200ish idle players based on that wording. Also what is a Manul? That part is also poorly worded.

But the killer is “When a Manul wearing an Amulet dies, that Amulet disappears.”—there is no bound association between Manul’s and Amulets. Really all you have is some amulets, and an integer amount of Manuls, and the requirement that you have fewer amulets than Manuls. If you want to form a specific link between Manuls and Amulets its gonna need a rewording…


24-07-2012 22:22:38 UTC

In case anyone else was wondering:

quirck: he/him

24-07-2012 22:30:38 UTC

Ids will be numbers, so that’s not really a problem, though I indeed forgot “active players”.

As for the association… I thought it as a Manul wears an Amulet and he can’t give it to any other Manul since it isn’t written in the rules yet. So when a Manul dies, the Amulet he was wearing must cease to exist. It is needed when all Manuls of a Farmer have Amulets, otherwise indeed he may say that the Manul that died hadn’t an Amulet.

There will be no specific link, Manuls will be able to lose and gain Amulets. It isn’t important, I think, which Manul exactly wears an Amulet, it’s important that there exists a Manul of a certain Farmer wearing Amulet with a certain id.

Clucky: he/him

24-07-2012 22:33:28 UTC

But Manuls are not specific, at least as written by the rules. There is just a number of them. Are you supposed to refer to them by their amulet? Just seems kinda clunky to me.

quirck: he/him

24-07-2012 22:36:28 UTC

I don’t want to refer to specific Manuls. They are indistinguishable unless they wear Amulets. Then they may be referred to by their Amulet


24-07-2012 22:36:45 UTC

for I’m fine with this for now.

Clucky: he/him

24-07-2012 22:41:22 UTC

I still think its clunkly worded and is going to require future proposals to be clunkierly worded to keep up. But I guess if it gets too bad we can clean it up later…


24-07-2012 22:44:21 UTC

Nomic is change.

Vovix: he/him

24-07-2012 22:48:50 UTC

for If it gets too clunky, we can change it.

Clucky: he/him

24-07-2012 23:07:40 UTC

Its still better to do things write first than recklessly run down the road trying to fix the wagon as its going. A lot of the success of a good round of blognomic is in the first few proposals.


25-07-2012 01:15:48 UTC

Per rule 1.2.1, most rules implicitly omit idle players.


25-07-2012 13:11:59 UTC


Josh: he/they

25-07-2012 13:55:07 UTC